AMIStem H Femoral Stems 01.18.141Recalls & reported problems
Medacta International SA · AMIStem-H Lat. # 1 · Class 2 · Implant
All models of AMIStem H Femoral Stems (20)
Data updated Oct 18, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy
- Adverse event reports
- 13
- Deaths reported
- 0
- Injuries reported
- 13
- Recalls naming it
- 0
Summary
The FDA's MAUDE database contains 13 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 07630030804175), received between Dec 15, 2017 and Jun 25, 2024 — classified as 13 injuries.
The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Osseointegration Problem” (3 reports).
1 other recall cover devices cleared under the same FDA submission (K093944, K250450); they may or may not involve this specific model.
Reports come from manufacturers, hospitals and patients and are not verified by the FDA. A report does not prove the device caused the event, and counts can't be used to compare devices or estimate failure rates. What reports can and can't tell you · How this data works · Data updated Oct 18, 2026.
Reports received per month
Most reported problems
Device problems
- Appropriate Device Problem Term/Code Not Available4
- Osseointegration Problem3
- Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth2
- Malposition of Device2
- Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem1
- Device Slipped1
- Fracture1
- Insufficient Device Problem Information1
Patient problems
- Inadequate Osseointegration4
- Joint Disorder3
- Bone Fracture(s)2
- Hip Fracture1
- Insufficient Information1
- Osteolysis1
- Pain1
Recent adverse event reports
The 13 most recent of 13 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.
InjuryJun 25, 2024Osseointegration Problem; Osseointegration Problem
AT ABOUT 10 YEARS AND 9 MONTHS AFTER PRIMARY, THE PATIENT HAS BEEN REVISED BECAUSE OF ASEPTIC LOOSENING OF THE STEM. THE SURGERY HAS BEEN COMPLETED SUCCESSFULLY.
Patient problems: Inadequate Osseointegration
MAUDE report 19606725 ↗InjuryNov 8, 2023Osseointegration Problem; Osseointegration Problem
AT ABOUT 7 YEARS AND 7 MONTHS FROM THE PRIMARY, THE PATIENT CAME IN REPORTING PAIN DUE TO A LOOSE STEM AND THE CAUSE OF THE LOOSE STEM IS UNKNOWN. THE SURGEON REVISED THE MEDACTA HEAD AND STEM WITH COMPETITOR COMPONENTS AND REVISED THE MEDACTA LINER WITH A MEDACTA LINER. THE SURGERY WAS COMPLETED SUCCESSFULLY.
Patient problems: Inadequate Osseointegration
MAUDE report 18092792 ↗InjuryOct 14, 2022Osseointegration Problem; Osseointegration Problem
AT ABOUT 10 YEARS AFTER THE PRIMARY, REVISION OF THE HIP STEM PERFORMED FOLLOWING THE ASEPTICAL LOOSENING OF THE STEM.
Patient problems: Inadequate Osseointegration
MAUDE report 15604261 ↗InjuryJul 21, 2022Appropriate Device Problem Term/Code Not Available
REVISION SURGERY PERFORMED DUE TO STEM MOBILIZATION AFTER 9 YEARS AND 2 MONTHS FROM THE PRIMARY SURGERY.
Patient problems: Insufficient Information
MAUDE report 15075386 ↗InjuryDec 23, 2021Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth
AT 8 YEARS AND 5 MONTHS AFTER THE PRIMARY SURGERY, REVISION SURGERY WAS PERFORMED. THE PATIENT HAD A FALL AROUND 2016 AND NOBODY NOTICED THAT PROBABLY HAD A FRACTURE IN THE FEMUR, WHICH MAY HAVE CAUSED THE SUBSIDENCE OF THE STEM.
Patient problems: Bone Fracture(s)
MAUDE report 13074877 ↗InjuryNov 15, 2019Loosening of Implant Not Related to Bone-Ingrowth
ABOUT 6 YEARS AND 4 MONTHS AFTER PRIMARY THE SURGEON REVISED THE PATIENT HIP FOR STEM LOOSENING. STEM AND HEAD REPLACED SUCCESSFULLY.
Patient problems: Inadequate Osseointegration
MAUDE report 9326061 ↗InjuryAug 14, 2019Fracture; Appropriate Device Problem Term/Code Not Available
REASON FOR REVISION WAS DUE TO SECONDARY FRACTURE BELOW STEM. SECONDARY FRACTURE OCCURRED 4 MONTHS AND A HALF AFTER PRIMARY (3 MONTHS AND 1 WEEK AFTER FIRST FRACTURE) THUS WE WERE ALERTED ON (B)(6) 2019 THAT THE REVISION OF STEM AND FEMORAL HEAD WOULD BE PERFORMED ON (B)(6) 2019.
Patient problems: Bone Fracture(s)
MAUDE report 8893109 ↗InjuryJul 11, 2019Malposition of Device; Appropriate Device Problem Term/Code Not Available
IMMEDIATE POST-OP SURGERY X-RAYS (THE SAME DAY AS PRIMARY SURGERY) REVEALED THAT THE STEM PERFORATED THE FEMUR AND PLACED WITH A FALSE ROOT. REVISION SURGERY PERFORMED THE SAME DAY THROUGH AMIS APPROACH PERFORMED SUCCESSFULLY REPOSITIONING AND REPLACING THE STEM.
Patient problems: Hip Fracture
MAUDE report 8780214 ↗InjuryApr 24, 2019Appropriate Device Problem Term/Code Not Available
REVISION SURGERY AFTER 2 YEARS AND 1 MONTH FROM THE PRIMARY DUE TO PAIN AND INSTABILITY (RADIOLUCENCIES OF AN AMISTEM HA COATED 1 LATERALIZED CEMENTLESS WERE DETECTED). REVISION SURGERY PERFORMED IMPLANTING A QUADRA-C STEM 1 LATERALIZED + PLUG 1.
Patient problems: Joint Disorder
MAUDE report 8544517 ↗InjuryJan 9, 2019Loose or Intermittent Connection
ABOUT 6 YEARS AND 8 MONTHS AFTER PRIMARY THE SURGEON REVISED THE PATIENT HIP FOR STEM LOOSENING. THE SURGERY WAS COMPLETED SUCCESSFULLY.
Patient problems: Joint Disorder
MAUDE report 8230877 ↗InjuryJun 13, 2018Insufficient Device Problem Information
ABOUT 4 YEARS AFTER PRIMARY THE SURGEON REVISED THE PATIENT RIGHT HIP FOR OSTEOLYSIS. THE SURGERY WAS COMPLETED SUCCESSFULLY.
Patient problems: Osteolysis
MAUDE report 7596015 ↗InjuryFeb 21, 2018Device Slipped; Malposition of Device
ABOUT 6 YEARS AFTER PRIMARY THE SURGEON REVISED THE PATIENT DUE TO STEM LOOSENING AND MALPOSITIONED CUP. THE SURGERY WAS COMPLETED SUCCESSFULLY.
Patient problems: Joint Disorder
MAUDE report 7285375 ↗InjuryDec 15, 2017Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
ONE YEAR AND 9 MONTHS AFTER PRIMARY THE SURGEON REVISED THE PATIENT FOR HIP PAIN. HEAD AND STEM SWAPPED SUCCESSFULLY.
Patient problems: Pain
MAUDE report 7121383 ↗
Recalls under the same FDA submission
These recalls involve devices cleared under K093944, K250450. One submission often covers many models, so check the product and lot details in each record.
- Z-0791-2013 · Dec 17, 2012 · TerminatedMedacta Quadra Trial Broach size 0 part # 01.10.10.045, for use with the Medacta Total Hip Prosthesis System. Product Usage - used to broach the intramedullary canal of the femur
Other Prosthesis, Hip, Semi-Constrained, Uncemented, Metal/Polymer, Non-Porous, Calicum-Phosphate devices
- Novation 130-32-51Exactech, Inc. · Prosthesis, Hip, Semi-Constrained, Uncemented, Metal/Polymer, Non-Porous, Calicum-Phosphate2 recalls156 reports
- Novation 130-36-53Exactech, Inc. · Prosthesis, Hip, Semi-Constrained, Uncemented, Metal/Polymer, Non-Porous, Calicum-Phosphate2 recalls79 reports
- CORAIL 3L92511Depuy (Ireland) · Prosthesis, hip, semi-constrained, uncemented, metal/polymer, non-porous, calicum-phosphate158 reports
- Acumatch A Series 138-36-29Exactech, Inc. · Prosthesis, Hip, Semi-Constrained, Uncemented, Metal/Polymer, Non-Porous, Calicum-Phosphate3 recalls1 report
- Novation 136-32-51Exactech, Inc. · Prosthesis, Hip, Semi-Constrained, Uncemented, Metal/Polymer, Non-Porous, Calicum-Phosphate2 recalls43 reports
- Novation 130-32-53Exactech, Inc. · Prosthesis, Hip, Semi-Constrained, Uncemented, Metal/Polymer, Non-Porous, Calicum-Phosphate2 recalls33 reports
- Novation 132-32-51Exactech, Inc. · Prosthesis, Hip, Semi-Constrained, Uncemented, Metal/Polymer, Non-Porous, Calicum-Phosphate2 recalls26 reports
- Novation 136-36-53Exactech, Inc. · Prosthesis, Hip, Semi-Constrained, Uncemented, Metal/Polymer, Non-Porous, Calicum-Phosphate2 recalls22 reports
Sources and updates
- Device record: FDA GUDID, file dated Oct 13, 2026 · View this device in AccessGUDID ↗
- Adverse event reports: FDA MAUDE, file dated Oct 14, 2026 · each report above links to its original FDA record
- Recalls: FDA Medical Device Recalls, file dated Oct 16, 2026
- Page last rebuilt: Oct 18, 2026. Data downloaded through openFDA, which notes it is not validated for clinical or regulatory use.
How reports and recalls are matched · Editorial policy · Report an error on this page